Ever want to post something but decided it was too insignificant to warrant a whole thread? Bring it here!

Ok, I'll go first... ahem.

RASPBERRY LEMONADE IS DELICIOUS.

__________________My 3-year-old daughter just looked at me very gravely and said, quite clearly: "Dad, Rainbow Dash is my favorite special pony friend." - Droplede
Without t3ch, this place would quickly be revealed to be a thin tissue of lies. - Jasper383
Your backtalk:sandwich ratio is astronomically out of whack - C7

If by "more" you mean a job, a home, and food on the table, then we agree.

But most people aren't going without food, and while unemployment is high, do you really think that's who's standing on wall street? People lost houses, but were those people who bought houses they could afford or people who bought houses that were 10 times their annual income and paid 5% down?

Quote:

We went on vacation to Tampa last month, where we lived during the 05-07 boom times.

And that's just it - Boom times...This is harsh, but anyone who thinks the boom is going to last forever deserves what they got. There's a reason it's called a "boom" (by definition it won't last).

I remember one of my professors in the late 90s (so a decade before the recent issues) saying "you all wait, you've grown up when everyone's employed, when everything has been easy - when that ends, and it will, then you'll see who's prepared for the real world"

Quote:

So the people are hurting, losing houses, watching decades of accumulated prosperity disappear. I don't call that spoiled.

Then I would suggest your definition is very narrow. You said it yourself - they're watching "decades of accumulated prosperity disappear". At the same time, about 2/5 of the world's population is a peasant farmer in India or China living on about $1000 per year. 1/8 of the worlds population doesn't have access to clean water. 1/7 of the world lacks sufficient food.

Someone who has lost their job or their home is in a bad situation, I wouldn't say otherwise...But, despite the situation portrayed on the news or in political speeches, that's actually a relatively small portion of the country. And even for those who have suffered that fate, they're still way better off than the majority of the world's population. For crying out loud, the homeless in America can eat enough that obesity is a major health issue for them (studies show well over half are overweight) - Think the poor in Somalia or Bangladesh have that issue?

I grew up under the poverty line for most of my youth. In Jr. High., our household income was (maybe) $15,000 in good years. We almost lost our house twice. I go home to the Detroit area four or five times per year, and supposedly no area has been hit as hard...But looking back I see prosperity and I still see it today.

The US population has had a negative savings rate for years - That wouldn't have even been possible without remarkable economic prosperity. The US population averages $16,000 in consumer debt per household - They couldn't have kept that up for years without remarkable economic prosperity.

Whether the complaint is "I want more" or "I want it to go back like it was when we were ridiculously prosperous" doesn't matter; both are born of a generation raised in an extended boom and neither are going to effect any real change nor steel anyone to the dedication necessary to sustain a political movement.

__________________All Glory to the Hypnotoad!

"Flying underwater is a helluva thing." - Bro. Mango
"be warned - all women are lying cheating whores" - Weirdocat
"In my opinion it would be a lot better to get some fact into our STUFF" - Helen V. Beden.

You absolutely can protest. However, in order for your protests to have any kind of effect, it has to be clear what you want. What you want also has to make some kind of sense.

I don't know about that. Maybe you need to start with the demonstrations to get the attention, and make up the reasons as you go along. I think the Tea Party started with one ideal, as you mention below, and then morphed into something entirely different over time. But the important thing was you had people showing up, which made others take notice.

Quote:

VikingWarlord said...

The TEA protests began with a clear goal. Stop taxing the fuck out of the middle class. As those gained more ground, the crazies started coming out. Once it was a large enough platform, politicians joined in. Now...well, you see what happened now.

Compare this to the OWS protests. There are a lot of people just doing little more than bitching. Check out We Are The 99%. Some people have gotten legitimately shafted. However, there are also people bitching about their bad decisions. Everyone makes mistakes.

There are a lot of these people complaining about not being able to find a job with their degrees. One girl has a sign talking about going into 6 figure debt to get a Ph.D in Plant Genetics or something like that. Welcome to academia, eat your Ramen and shut the fuck up. Your dream was to study Marine Biology or Journalism? Fine. You don't get to piss and moan because you pursued something that has no practical use.

A few of them are artists. Well, that's your fucking problem. Get a skill that someone cares about. I have a friend who's currently entertaining 7 offers as a web application developer, with the minimum offer being $60K. He busted his ass for years as a freelancer to hone a skill that has some demand.

Being a dirtbag sleeping in a tent on the sidewalk in protest is just practice for sleeping on the sidewalk when your shitty life decisions mean you don't have a place to live.

Now I have to go get shit done because I have to get up in the morning so I can Occupy The Job I Got Because I Have Useful Skills.

Can't say I disagree with most of this. Doesn't mean that hidden in there isn't a legitimate complaint. Fer instance: Why do we let people take out 6 figures worth of loans for an academic discipline? We know how much these degrees pay inthe first 5 years int he work force. Index the debt to that figure. You'll max out at $50K as a jellyfish inseminator (marine bio degree)? Thats all we'll loan you.

__________________
Just ask yourself "When was the last time my Senator or Representative had to look for a new job?"

The US population has had a negative savings rate for years - That wouldn't have even been possible without remarkable economic prosperity. The US population averages $16,000 in consumer debt per household - They couldn't have kept that up for years without remarkable economic prosperity.

...Whether the complaint is "I want more" or "I want it to go back like it was when we were ridiculously prosperous" doesn't matter; both are born of a generation raised in an extended boom and neither are going to effect any real change nor steel anyone to the dedication necessary to sustain a political movement.

Um, why wait until things are as bad as Bangladesh to make a stink? I get where you are coming from on boom/bust, and I get growing up poor (single mom, 3 kids, welfare, etc). But any movement has to start somewhere, you know?

No doubt. Shockingly, the savings rate issue is actually the much larger one, since that means that most people are going to keep getting worse.

But without that never ending cycle of debt, the consumer economy doesn't run. Kind of a bug disguised as a feature. Save too much, demand drops, etc. Plus for the last 10 years any gain you made from traditional savings (money in bank, not investments) tended to be eaten by inflation due to the absurdly low interest rates available to consumer savers. Why save if you lose money? Which led to money getting pumped into investments, asset bubbles, etc.

Tangent: Other fascinating literature (sci fi) is Paolo Bacigalupi's stuff- the Windup Girl and his short stories collection (pump six?)

It doesn't have to...But without true hardship, there won't be true dedication. If there are even a dozen people on Wall Street right now who, when offered the choice "Give up your life and everything will be fixed for everyone else..." would genuinely accept it, I'd be amazed. Honestly, I'd be shocked if there was even one.

Quote:

But any movement has to start somewhere, you know?

And if you think that movement is going to start among discontented middle class people taking time off work to protest - then you have a much more optimistic view of things.

The folks who desperately want jobs? They might be hungry enough to make the necessary sacrifices...except they're too busy trying to find work to feed their families.

Maybe if things were truly bad, they'd have given up that hope and, with nothing left to lose, provide that determination, but things aren't that bad (they're not even close)...which is essentially my point.

I don't know about that. Maybe you need to start with the demonstrations to get the attention, and make up the reasons as you go along. I think the Tea Party started with one ideal, as you mention below, and then morphed into something entirely different over time. But the important thing was you had people showing up, which made others take notice.

It's still just completely disorganized which doesn't accomplish anything productive. When something large scale becomes defocused, it's much easier to exploit.

Quote:

Ender said...

Can't say I disagree with most of this. Doesn't mean that hidden in there isn't a legitimate complaint. Fer instance: Why do we let people take out 6 figures worth of loans for an academic discipline? We know how much these degrees pay inthe first 5 years int he work force. Index the debt to that figure. You'll max out at $50K as a jellyfish inseminator (marine bio degree)? Thats all we'll loan you.

Why should it be the responsibility of anyone but the individual? Forcing these kinds of regulations is nanny-state foolishness, protecting the citizens from themselves.

Maybe if things were truly bad, they'd have given up that hope and, with nothing left to lose, provide that determination, but things aren't that bad (they're not even close)...which is essentially my point.

I think a closer look at (specifically) the Egyptian protests would say otherwise. And to some extent the Green movement in Iran. Mostly middle class folks pissed off about how their lives are being run. People in the US don't want REVOLUTION, they want REFORM, which takes far less grit, and more perseverance.

Random example of whats wrong: Indexing executive pay to industry mean, and then aiming to pay 25% above that mean. Which leads to a never ending spiral, which is never questioned by the guys GETTING those paychecks, but which leads to "needing to cut costs" somewhere else, often in benefits, wages, or off shoring. Discuss.

But without that never ending cycle of debt, the consumer economy doesn't run.

Not at all. It worked for decades with a positive savings rate. It's only in recent years that it's changed.

Quote:

Plus for the last 10 years any gain you made from traditional savings (money in bank, not investments) tended to be eaten by inflation due to the absurdly low interest rates available to consumer savers. Why save if you lose money?

Because you're excluding investment for no reason?

Investment is savings. When "savings rate" is used, it's not about bank accounts, but net worth. Savings accounts are for cash flow, not real savings; I'm talking about true investment in personal and household net worth.

Quote:

Which led to money getting pumped into investments, asset bubbles, etc.

You're conflating investment and speculation - they're two distinctly different things (despite working through the same financial mechanisms). Investment is the growth of wealth through returns on production profits. Speculation is the growth of wealth through realized profit on perceived increases in market value.

Random example of whats wrong: Indexing executive pay to industry mean, and then aiming to pay 25% above that mean. Which leads to a never ending spiral, which is never questioned by the guys GETTING those paychecks, but which leads to "needing to cut costs" somewhere else, often in benefits, wages, or off shoring. Discuss.

Non-issue. If the compensation model doesn't work to the benefit of the corporation, another corporation takes its place.

Non-issue. If the compensation model doesn't work to the benefit of the corporation, another corporation takes its place.

Unless Uncle Sugar pays the tab. And how long do the workers put up with this shit, getting progressively less and less in return for their labor across the market while the head guy, who may even have lost money, keeps getting raises?